On Fri, 13 May 2011 21:52:47 -0400, Robert Haas
wrote:
You probably want to add it here, then:
https://commitfest.postgresql.org/action/commitfest_view/open
I's been in the last commitfest and i've recently moved it to the
current one already.
See https://commitfest.postgresql.org/action/pa
On Fri, May 13, 2011 at 08:55:34PM -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Fri, May 13, 2011 at 4:16 PM, Noah Misch wrote:
> > If I'm understanding correctly, your pseudocode would look roughly like
> > this:
> >
> > ? ? ? ?if (level >= ShareUpdateExclusiveLock)
> I think ShareUpdateExclusiveLock should
On Thu, May 12, 2011 at 5:55 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> I wrote:
>> I think the appropriate fix is pretty clear: add a function similar to
>> exec_get_datum_type that returns the datum's typmod, and use that to set
>> paramtypmod properly. What is worrying me is that it's not clear how
>> much user-vi
On Fri, May 13, 2011 at 5:34 PM, Brar Piening wrote:
> After some months of being able to regularly compile current head using
> Visual Studio 2010 compilers and some more tests I no longer see any reason
> why this patch would change without external feedback.
You probably want to add it here, t
On Fri, May 13, 2011 at 6:34 PM, Cédric Villemain
wrote:
> Will you be able to do some ? or can you propose a simple process to
> do efficient benchmark of the patch ?
I will probably do some benchmarking at some point, unless someone
else goes nuts and makes it moot before I get to that point.
On Fri, May 13, 2011 at 4:16 PM, Noah Misch wrote:
> The key is putting a rapid hard stop to all fast-path lock acquisitions and
> then reconstructing a valid global picture of the affected lock table regions.
> Your 1024-way table of strong lock counts sounds promising. (Offhand, I do
> think th
Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > >> ? ? ? Performing Consistency Checks
> > >> ? ? ? -
> > >> ? ? ? ignoring libpq environment variable PGPORT
> > >
> > > I haven't tried it, but I suppose option.c will now make use of PGPORT
> > > and then later you get that message that it was
On Thu, 2011-05-12 at 19:37 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>
>
> It should be okay to move, since the -devel subpackage requires the
> main one. Therefore there is no configuration in which pg_config
> would be present before and missing after the change.
Thanks Tom. I can make this change in next bui
On May 13, 2011, at 2:07 AM, Alexey Klyukin wrote:
> On May 13, 2011, at 1:28 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
>
>>
>> We're not likely to do that, first because it's randomly different from
>> the handling of every other system catalog update, and second because it
>> would serialize all updates on this ca
On Fri, May 13, 2011 at 6:02 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Gurjeet Singh writes:
> > I am listing the query, it's explain output and explain analyze output at
> > the end.
>
> > The EXPLAIN output shows the 'Subplan 2' node only once, whereas EXPLAIN
> > ANALYZE output shows that the 'Subplan 2' is bein
Hi,
On Apr 14, 2011, at 9:50 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 4, 2011 at 2:03 PM, Alexey Klyukin
> wrote:
>> Here's the update of Selena's patch, which also shows all errors in
>> configuration parameters (as well as parser errors) during reload.
>
> You should add this here:
>
> https://
2011/5/11 Robert Haas :
> On Wed, May 11, 2011 at 3:17 AM, Simon Riggs wrote:
>> Completely agree, but why are you saying that to me?
>>
>> When Tom asks me why I suggest something, nobody tells him "its a free
>> software project etc...".
>>
>> What is the difference here?
>
> We're now 40 emails
Gurjeet Singh writes:
> I am listing the query, it's explain output and explain analyze output at
> the end.
> The EXPLAIN output shows the 'Subplan 2' node only once, whereas EXPLAIN
> ANALYZE output shows that the 'Subplan 2' is being executed twice . Is that
> true? Or is it just the plan prin
Kevin Barnard wrote:
> A ticketing system with work flow could help with transparency.
> If it's setup correctly the work flow could help document where
> the item is in the review process. As another idea maybe have a
> status to indicate that the patch has been reviewed for
> formatting. It
On Sun, 06 Feb 2011 23:06:21 +0100, Brar Piening wrote:
On Sun, 30 Jan 2011 21:26:22 +0100, Magnus Hagander
wrote:
it's not something we should hold up the CF / release for.
I agree.
At least it should get some more testing besides mine.
[...]
Being somewhat short of time in the next weeks
On May 9, 2011, at 12:53 PM, Josh Berkus wrote:
>
> 2) Our process for reviewing and approving patches, and what criteria
> such patches are required to meet, is *very* opaque to a first-time
> submitter (as in no documentation the submitter knows about), and does
> not become clearer as they go t
I am listing the query, it's explain output and explain analyze output at
the end.
The EXPLAIN output shows the 'Subplan 2' node only once, whereas EXPLAIN
ANALYZE output shows that the 'Subplan 2' is being executed twice . Is that
true? Or is it just the plan printer getting confused? Is the conf
On Fri, May 13, 2011 at 09:07:34AM -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> Actually, it's occurred to me from time to time that it would be nice
> to eliminate ACCESS SHARE (and while I'm dreaming, maybe ROW SHARE and
> ROW EXCLUSIVE) locks for tables as well. Under normal operating
> conditions (i.e. no DDL
2011/5/11 Shigeru Hanada :
> (2011/04/26 5:42), Robert Haas wrote:
>> OK. Turned out a little more cleanup was needed to make this all the
>> way consistent with how we handle views; I have now done that.
>
> I noticed that some fixes would be needed for consistency about foreign
> table privilege
what's changed:
*) as advertised, i'm no longer bothering to cache invalid bits. hint
bit i/o via rollbacked transactions is not a big deal IMNSHO, so they
will work as they have always done.
*) all the tuple visibility routines are now participating in the cache
*) xmax commit bits are now being
Robert Haas writes:
> On Fri, May 13, 2011 at 12:12 PM, Nick Raj wrote:
>> Can you throw some light on how to debug contrib/cube code?
> On my system, if I configure --enable-debug, the contrib modules are
> compiled with debug support as well.
Depending on what platform you're using, it may be
On Fri, May 13, 2011 at 12:12 PM, Nick Raj wrote:
> Sorry i don't know about AFAICS.
> Yes, i want to modify cube code for this i want to go in detail by
> debugging.
> Can you throw some light on how to debug contrib/cube code?
"AFAICS" is short for "as far as I can see".
On my system, if I con
Peter Eisentraut writes:
> On ons, 2011-05-11 at 16:47 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Hm, do you know how to enumerate the available locales on Windows?
> EnumSystemLocalesEx()
> Reference:
> http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/dd317829(v=vs.85).aspx
> Example: http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/li
Sorry i don't know about AFAICS.
Yes, i want to modify cube code for this i want to go in detail by
debugging.
Can you throw some light on how to debug contrib/cube code?
On Fri, May 6, 2011 at 9:59 PM, Euler Taveira de Oliveira wrote:
> Em 06-05-2011 02:14, Nick Raj escreveu:
>
> I am using po
Robert Haas wrote:
> Kevin Grittner wrote:
>> Anyway, I could clean up all but that last issue in the old code.
>> I'm not sure whether that makes sense if you're refactoring it
>> anyway. Would you like me to look at the refactored code to
>> suggest fixes? Would you rather do it yourself based
On 13 May 2011 16:18, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Fri, May 13, 2011 at 10:48 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> I'm not that thrilled with the "life sign" terminology, but don't
>> have a better idea right offhand.
>
> Yeah, that made no sense to me. Can't we just refer to detecting
> postmaster death?
Fine by
On Fri, May 13, 2011 at 10:48 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
> I'm not that thrilled with the "life sign" terminology, but don't
> have a better idea right offhand.
Yeah, that made no sense to me. Can't we just refer to detecting
postmaster death?
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
"MauMau" wrote:
> From: "Robert Haas"
>> I think Tom had the right idea upthread: what we should do is
>> make the "-s" option to pg_ctl suppress these messages (as it
>> does with similar messages on Linux). Removing them altogether
>> seems like overkill, for the reasons you mention.
Agree
Peter Geoghegan writes:
> Attached is a patch that builds upon Florian Pflug's earlier proof of
> concept program for monitoring the postmaster.
Cool. Like Robert, no time to review this in detail now, but ...
> How should I be handling the EXEC_BACKEND case?
Assuming that the open pipe descri
From: "Robert Haas"
On Thu, May 12, 2011 at 2:57 PM, Kevin Grittner
wrote:
I wish the fix will be back-patched in 8.3, too.
I guess the question is whether this is a bug which causes more
problems than the potential breakage which might ensue for someone
who relies on the current behavior. Ho
Is this a TODO? I don't see it on the TODO list.
---
Robert Haas wrote:
> On Fri, May 13, 2011 at 12:56 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
> > BTW, I thought a bit more about why I didn't like the initial proposal
> > in this thread, and
On Fri, May 13, 2011 at 12:56 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
> BTW, I thought a bit more about why I didn't like the initial proposal
> in this thread, and the basic objection is this: the AccessShareLock or
> RowExclusiveLock we take on the catalog is not meant to provide any
> serialization of operations o
On Thu, May 12, 2011 at 11:55 AM, Kevin Grittner
wrote:
> Robert Haas wrote:
>
>> Unfortunately, people often come into our community with incorrect
>> assumptions about how it works, including:
>>
>> - someone's in charge
>> - there's one right answer
>> - it's our job to fix your problem
>
> Wo
On Fri, May 13, 2011 at 8:06 AM, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
> Attached is a patch that builds upon Florian Pflug's earlier proof of
> concept program for monitoring the postmaster. The code creates a
> non-blocking pipe in the postmaster that child processes block on
> using a select() call. This all
Attached is a patch that builds upon Florian Pflug's earlier proof of
concept program for monitoring the postmaster. The code creates a
non-blocking pipe in the postmaster that child processes block on
using a select() call. This all occurs in the latch code, which now
monitors postmaster death, bu
Heikki Linnakangas writes:
>> Anyway, I think the intro message should be "Don't submit a big patch to
>> PostgreSQL until you've done a small patch and some patch review"
>> instead though.
>
> Well, my first patch was two-phase commit. And I had never even used
> PostgreSQL before I dived into t
On Fri, May 13, 2011 at 6:05 AM, Martin Belleau
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> First, sorry - I really didn't know to which list to post this.
>
> I'm looking to either write or get access to something like the EnterpriseDB
> installer for windows, which doesn't seem to be kept up to date anymore.
>
> The insta
37 matches
Mail list logo
